ERA24LA256 · Zenith 701

The pilot was flying the experimental amateur-built airplane in the airport traffic pattern. After completing two low approaches to the runway, the pilot was approaching the runway for a third time and had been cleared by the air traffic controller to land. The pilot reported that while on short final approach, he encountered a large number of birds and elected to perform a go-around to the left of the runway; however, the airplane did not climb as the pilot expected and collided with trees short of the runway. The air traffic controller described that while the accident airplane was on final approach, at an altitude about 20 ft above the runway, it abruptly turned 45° left and appeared “out of control.” The airplane subsequently began to climb before it turned hard left and descended in a nose down attitude into the trees.

The pilot had accrued 490 total hours of flight experience, of which 1 hour was in the accident airplane make and model. The owner of the airplane stated that the pilot was attempting to build flight experience to meet the requirements of an airline transport pilot certificate. The owner agreed to let him fly the airplane, but required the pilot to fly with a flight instructor due to his lack of experience in the airplane make and model. The pilot did not follow the owner’s instructions and was flying solo at the time of the accident.

After the accident, the engine was test-run to full power at a recovery facility. Given that the engine was able to be successfully run after the accident, it is unlikely that there was a mechanical failure or malfunction before the accident that would have precluded its normal operation. The temperature and dewpoint conditions at the time of the accident were conducive to the formation of carburetor icing at cruise or idle engine power settings, and the pilot did not describe his use of carburetor heat during the landing approach or go-around attempt. It could not be determined whether or not carburetor icing impacted the engine’s production of power.

The air traffic controller’s description of the airplane’s abrupt left turn, that it appeared “out of control,” and that it descended in a steep nose down attitude suggest that the airplane had encountered an aerodynamic stall during the go-around attempt. The relatively low-energy impact signatures observed on the wreckage were also consistent with this description. Based on the available information, it is likely that the pilot failed to maintain control of the airplane during a go-around attempt, which resulted in an exceedance of the airplane’s critical angle of attack and an aerodynamic stall/spin. Whether a partial loss of engine power preceded this loss of control could not be determined.

Verbatim NTSB analysis and probable cause from the NTSB dataset